W3C home > Mailing lists > Public > w3c-wai-eo@w3.org > January to March 2008

Re: Usefulness of compliance section in Web Accessible Mobile document

From: Paul Walsh <paul@segala.com>
Date: Fri, 22 Feb 2008 13:57:29 +0000
Message-Id: <8BC79DCE-08C5-4625-9FB6-720195A582EA@segala.com>
Cc: "Sean Owen" <srowen@google.com>, "Phil Archer" <parcher@icra.org>, "MWI BPWG Public" <public-bpwg@w3.org>, "EOWG" <w3c-wai-eo@w3.org>
To: Jo Rabin <jrabin@mtld.mobi>

For what it's worth, I agree.

On 19 Feb 2008, at 14:50, Jo Rabin wrote:

> No I don't think we are quite answering the same thing.
> Firstly I think there is the notion of compliance to Best Practices,
> though the notion of compliance to mobileOK is much more hard edged.
> Secondly there is value in stating that compliance with the Best
> Practices produces accessibility benefits that do not assist with
> complicance [because they have been dropped as untestable in WCAG 2.0,
> or for any other reason]
> Thirdly, there's likely to be benefit the other way round too, i.e.
> compliance with WCAG 2.0 is likely to have mobility benefits that are
> not spelled out in the best practices (because we determined that the
> benefits they bring are not specifically mobile enough, for example).
> jo
>> -----Original Message-----
>> From: Sean Owen [mailto:srowen@google.com]
>> Sent: 19 February 2008 14:41
>> To: Jo Rabin
>> Cc: Phil Archer; MWI BPWG Public; EOWG
>> Subject: Re: Usefulness of compliance section in Web Accessible  
>> Mobile
>> document
>> To be sure we're answering the same question -- seems like the
>> question was not whether following BPs or mobileOK improves your
>> compliance with WCAG, but whether we should have a notion of what is
>> recommended, beyond what is necessary for compliance, with Best
>> Practices. My assertion is that Best Practices can include all these
>> elements and that there is no notion of compliance with BPs. Some
>> subset of what is in BPs will be translated into mobileOK, for which
>> there is a clear notion of compliance. Done.
>> On Feb 19, 2008 7:33 AM, Jo Rabin <jrabin@mtld.mobi> wrote:
>>>> From our reading of the document over the last couple of BP
> meetings it
>>> seems that there is a very substantial number that are noted as
>>> improving accessibility, though they don't improve your prospects of
>>> compliance. The overall conclusion I draw is that following Mobile
> Web
>>> Best Practice in general improves accessibility and to some more
> limited
>>> extent improves your chances of conformance. So like Phil, I agree
> that
>>> this should be spelled out.

Paul Walsh
Segala, CEO

Web site http://segala.com
Blog http://segala.com/blog
Twitter http://twitter.com/PaulWalsh

Mobile +44 (0)7738 758 848
Received on Friday, 22 February 2008 13:57:50 UTC

This archive was generated by hypermail 2.4.0 : Friday, 17 January 2020 20:29:42 UTC